Template:Did you know nominations/Satyam Infoway Ltd. v. Sifynet Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:44, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Satyam Infoway Ltd. v. Sifynet Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

(

)

... that Satyam Infoway Ltd. v. Sifynet Solutions Pvt. Ltd. dealt with the confusion of an unwary Internet user of "average intelligence and imperfect recollection"?

Reviewed: n/a (< 5 DYK)

Created/expanded by Yaj57 (talk). Nominated by Tristan Lall (talk) at 17:58, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Could you explain what is going on in the page history? Was the article created on 13 February and edited from there? Or was it blanked and started again from scratch on 29 February, in which case this is a 5x expansion? Yoninah (talk) 19:50, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

My understanding is that it was a draft on the creator's user page, until this: http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Satyam_Infoway_Ltd._v._Sifynet_Solutions_Pvt._Ltd.&diff=prev&oldid=479428068. That move was on the 29th, so I think the DYK would be classed as a new article, rather than an expansion. (As for the page-blanking weirdness, I think the creator was trying to add a correction, blanked it by accident, and Hallows AG acted quickly before Yaj57 could fix it.) Tristan Lall (talk) 20:28, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

OK, I see that creation date. Please be aware that articles nominated for DYK should be within 5 days of creation; however, we can extend that to up to 8 days, which I will do here. Age, length OK. Well-referenced; no close paraphrasing seen. Hook fact verified; I tweaked the hook a bit. Good to go. Yoninah (talk) 20:44, 13 March 2012 (UTC)